Judge dismisses women’s lawsuit accusing Curtis Hill of sexual harassment

  • Comments
  • Print
Listen to this story

Subscriber Benefit

As a subscriber you can listen to articles at work, in the car, or while you work out. Subscribe Now
This audio file is brought to you by
0:00
0:00
Loading audio file, please wait.
  • 0.25
  • 0.50
  • 0.75
  • 1.00
  • 1.25
  • 1.50
  • 1.75
  • 2.00

Please subscribe to IBJ to decode this article.

dnrHe eaedi lwatsefaImA et oso iCdli ia ro .hgrsposrtrtfem1iyuo uyleele e iyasnb AnirgG nhid vrtjdiuh0tis l sew daupi f8t g allalse2yeuw ddmn anaan gr

af m e — rir lsc cIaarsmucSueeai,entp mlamnwofdtr.aldel k.tse itwfocu tntg— atrbreoe nsnoeAcehnrvtaad’a o’ G liuy gtaoa stevnd aati deeewyunea ynonsehar-nkn 'tshtls nnhtir tnsthmloJnrih ttho ehat dctw reftD ehne hiehl eidvrneaal ii tmen aJctnatwdHSomrtr t. ftfe e e rigl pelb i saeiot psm ara fn dn ettianeihewselteu.tttowOan mgtoelndoetnihiisMllat adt,egsSeowsathnkyy g epi nos owas ctUa riea aderic

y aioxniriensticd scrcuab ei se d. l aetteld hoaabef vrtyiptfrie tech faso fl ai ito .oou,tadtimnrfanot alaeoaonntlnir scesresSdetsdhlea ua ia edSg ec atsar iasaltevsjtdflhw setsersedcaddc imirmvsmliae dptt talc ce eh rv nd ,iii aoa slnenummlenllea treold ar

in“teSoueiw ge tvn eetdtftcof rttoly ns og ird csge glnniesnrein hiotobeat lsouoth lds iaaslriBS ftmr vny -usetraaannasettegfdebl a alhs rt rhleu th cc tooeosnln e p aeyanoeta tn dti edeeGatle”tssldlywugfiioseac bhTynu.udeiscCslUdo ebfnsMs Ao.lahfrentrarraereetiele etln“aoH etiaoie,nhha”Cdh t

rss ureecerad oLath nace eettaflrTrLbawm trkcoiCtfmasvhisayeeDeRr 8es en aaatLtvhrohTt kRnerrn atSfiMretsenieMara ttiluItanapsu Dac.h2aald oedre,ujnifsiadgaf lobdzntl0ip dygn  e —, .ils uG e.,neerse awS,etnhreir hehcmaHoalNaM-at Je1a o ntld tMaie t n tlsl—dnrhaik eeagdioloryll dhai i saruua o oa ubybnp i a

ssnariirRantS ahwndad sfiepvt oCroD mecwn ce iut;eenrto itbaLeeosa n seot c lhacSztte a aus.anuclMeoelcd saavafsfteamen tr Die Iftiaeia iga m nlL ehti

hcnl seamatf tie chew,s leotcmrneomnfeooe haltirteoverptrfopnnTe.eneais oa meh let dtsan' etateeh rfhpa yadrneyastdhrdnevol gi tfbtas wtai ev a io momgll—s ha pebitH

tteohiflnien f.isodnt dlgci cdi.loa pogtacciaeaHsgsiwdiomoenergcdrnelAuadlagarmn rebnnnn f rn reopet v eaeelrgtnlneafsd urHr di ra hielol nr’eo lt naeialgos gi,dsoiirfpwtnniileba au suosesgcRdt cd sons

oiuias-0eseaeSastetglabheslanhnd waiosaetafad euecmtsato/ttr dieo6awentlit>HHb"te eowsf-tranaauhn.ns-rlmmtnihcusiueiinnee tcimp .tprellot

b;&n ps

Please enable JavaScript to view this content.

Editor's note: You can comment on IBJ stories by signing in to your IBJ account. If you have not registered, please sign up for a free account now. Please note our comment policy that will govern how comments are moderated.

12 thoughts on “Judge dismisses women’s lawsuit accusing Curtis Hill of sexual harassment

  1. So since the Evidence and Law has so many times indicated the accusers are without merit, their whole shirade needs to be dropped at once.

    Per the aforementioned, there is no legal standing to punish Hill and or suspend his law license.

    As the law stands at present Hill is an innocent man and still has my vote!

    1. Wrong, Darrell. Let’s start with the “Evidence and Law” having found no fault. The hearing officer (Myra Selby, a former Indiana SC justice) issued the recommendation that his law license should be suspended for 60 days – and without an automatic reinstatement. She didn’t do that on a whim. She listened to the evidence.

      IBJ article dated 2/14/2020 said: “She concluded Hill violated Indiana Rules of Professional Conduct 8.4(b) and (d) and committed Class B misdemeanor *battery* against four women–State Rep. Mara Candelaria Reardon and legislative staffers Gabrielle McLemore Brock, Niki DaSilva and Samantha Lozano. The rules violations are for a *criminal act* that reflects adversely on the lawyer’s honesty, trustworthiness or fitness as a lawyer and engaging in conduct is prejudicial to the administration of justice.”

      Maybe you don’t mind the Attorney General playing a little grab-$ss when he’s drunk – hey, it’s only a misdemeanor – but I doubt you’d be cool with him doing that to your wife or daughter. The AG is the chief law enforcement official in the state, not some flunky.

      The ISC will decide if Selby correctly applied the standards of the legal profession’s code of ethics. The fact the prosecutor or the IG decided to not file charges isn’t conclusive that he didn’t do anything wrong.

      Last, I usually don’t point out spelling mistakes, but for someone who uses “aforementioned”, I’m going to call you out on “shirade” – try “charade”. I grant you that the “s” is pretty close to the “c” on the keyboard, but the “i” in nowhere near the “a”.

  2. Just because a male was inclined to make “apparently” unwanted advances to one or more women, it does not follow that he should be the object of their collective ire or legal actions, including any Suspension by the Indiana Supreme Court. Any disciplinary action should correctly be left to a public, verbal flogging by his “peers,” who are not otherwise guilty of or have been accused of the same or similar conduct. After all, written or common law concerning “male-female” interactions can hardly override more than almost four (4) million years of human evolution, and that includes religious and secular teachings (sorry Moses and Jesus).

    1. Good synopsis, Robert B. Thanks.

      And, Darrell W., he still has my vote, too. Curtis Hill Jr. is a decent man with whom I’ve conversed several times. Hill’s speech two weeks ago at South Bend’s Southlawn Cemetery at the interment of the 2,411 remains of babies aborted by “Dr” Klopfer was excellent.

    2. Robert B, it seems you are about as enlightened about male/ female interactions as the Neanderthals, but they’ve been extinct for only 40,000 years, so I’m off by a factor of 100. There’s nothing “apparent” about his (OMG) “unwanted advances”. As I mentioned to Darrell W., maybe you don’t mind the Attorney General playing a little grab-$ss when he’s drunk – hey, it’s only a misdemeanor – but I doubt you’d be cool with him doing that to your wife or daughter.

      And grabbing someone’s rear-end is not an “unwanted advance”. An unwanted advance is saying something like “Hey, I’m into you, how about we bounce this place?” Not assaulting them.

      And what the heck does your last sentence even mean? Laws that run against your animal instincts shouldn’t be observed? Um, that’s civilization for you.

    3. Yes let’s let his disciplinary penalties be for the public to decide. I think you and Curtis might be surprised with the results.

    4. Sherman T

      I’m curious, what is your position on President Trump’s behavior and the accusations against him ?

Your go-to for Indy business news.

Try us out for

$1/week

Cancel anytime

Subscribe Now

Already a paid subscriber? Log In